Search form

Justice Dept. Sees Through AT&T's Jobs 'Promise'

The Department of Justice gave wireless customers an extremely
valuable gift last week when it filed suit to block the
AT&T/T-Mobile merger, a $39 billion boondoggle that would've made
AT&T richer and more powerful at the expense of everybody else. By
suing to block the merger, the Justice Department allowed consumers to
keep the benefits of the competition, innovation and choice that a
competitive market, such as it is, provides for us.

AT&T and its supporters, predictably, have been howling about the
decision, calling the Obama administration anti-business and saying the
DoJ is interfering with the market and killing jobs.

And they are being something less than candid.

The Justice Department made clear that the decision was made to protect competition and innovation
for all businesses and consumers, not just AT&T alone. What's good
for AT&T is not necessarily good for the rest of the telecom
industry, and certainly not for the rest of us.

The level to which AT&T was willing to stoop to enrich itself was
exemplified by an act so cynical, it could easily be described as
economic extortion.

The morning of Aug. 31, mere hours before the Justice Department
announced that it would block the merger, AT&T pledged to bring
5,000 call-center jobs back to the United States from overseas. If,
that is, its $39 billion merger with T-Mobile were approved.

AT&T and its allies tried painting this promise as a good-faith,
good-citizenship effort. But I am compelled to ask: What's so good about
holding 5,000 jobs hostage in exchange for a multi-billion dollar deal
that will hurt everyday American families? While millions look for work,
AT&T tauntingly dangles jobs like a schoolyard bully.

If we're to trust AT&T on its pledge — given its history of promising job growth and delivering job cuts,
there is good reason not to — 5,000 call center jobs that were
outsourced to countries where workers are paid pennies would come back,
but only in exchange for approval of a job-killing,
competition-destroying merger that would benefit pretty much nobody but
AT&T and its Wall Street investors. Removing the lowest-cost
national wireless carrier from the market and handing over its customers
to the highest-cost, worst-service carrier is clearly not in the public's best interest. It's a deal so bad that even independent investment analysts expressed grave doubts about its economic benefit.

Another question comes to mind: Why should repatriating jobs hinge on
the approval of this shakedown of a merger? AT&T has reported
enormous profits, quarter after quarter after quarter.
Unless call center workers are raking in seven-figure salaries, surely
there is enough money in AT&T's coffers to put 5,000 Americans on
the payroll without forcing thousands more job cuts upon us.

AT&T had such confidence — some might say hubris — that it behaved from the start as though the deal was already done. It had primed so many policymakers with liquor, food and cash, spending nearly $2 million a month on lobbyists, it could surely expect the machinery of Washington to turn in its favor, right? The Justice Department didn't see it that way.

Those are remarkably strong words from a government official,
especially a lawyer. They rarely speak in absolutes, so the fact Pozen
did so here speaks to the strength of the DoJ's case, and also to the
high unlikelihood that it is willing to negotiate a settlement. If the
offer AT&T put on the table in its fourth attempt to sway regulators
was irredeemably anti-competitive, what could it possibly add to make
them forget that 4 – 1 = 3?

AT&T has made overtures toward offering conditions and divestment,
according to reports quoting anonymous sources, which smacks of
insiders floating trial balloons to see if the idea gains any support.
So far, nobody in a position to accept a deal has shown interest. Not
even a mountain of cupcakes could sweeten this bitter deal.

But don't expect AT&T to roll over. It's pledged to "vigorously contest" the DoJ suit, and it has an extremely large war chest. However, much of its cheering section has gone conspicuously quiet ever since AT&T mistakenly released a confidential document
that undermined its primary argument for the merger. The document
revealed what the Justice Department made its primary focus: the merger
was less about improving service than about eliminating competition.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski, whose
agency could kill the deal even if the DoJ suit fails or settles,
offered this:
"Competition is an essential component of the FCC's statutory public
interest analysis, and although our process is not complete, the record
before this agency also raises serious concerns about the impact of the
proposed transaction on competition."

Reed Hundt, one of Genachowski's predecessors as FCC chair, had more explicitly discouraging words for AT&T. "AT&T is certain to lose," he said. "The Department of Justice will win the case in court. No question about it."

Perhaps instead of kicking, screaming and spending millions trying to
force the deal through, AT&T should just pay T-Mobile its $6 billion break-up fee, and spend $3.8 billion — the cost of expanding and improving its network, which it rejected in favor of pursuing the $39 billion merger — providing better service for its customers.

And maybe it could bring those 5,000 call center jobs back to America, just to be a good citizen.

Freepress.net is a project of Free Press and the Free Press Action Fund. Free Press and the Free Press Action Fund do not support or oppose any candidate for public office. We are nonpartisan organizations fighting to save the free and open Internet, curb runaway media consolidation, protect press freedom, and ensure diverse voices are represented in our media.